Is Capitalism God-Ordained?

[minkymurph]

Please tell us what other economic system promotes free enterprise and recognizes property rights.

Certainly.

I do not have time at the moment to provide you with scholarly journals on the topic, but I can give you the gist of it.

It is not in the interests of society for everything to be owned by private individuals. That does not mean nothing can, but not everything. I have provided a link below on property rights to give you some insight.

thecommonsjournal.org/index.php/ijc/article/view/252/182

There are many society’s that function very effectively with a system of communal living/ownership that runs parallel to private ownership and free enterprise. Now it can be argued such systems are not effective in the contemporary western societies, but there is a lot we can learn from their principles.

Here is an amazing documentary series.

bbc.co.uk/tribe/bruce/

There are many political theories that advocate free enterprise and private ownership, yet at the same time seek to uphold welfare principles to a greater extent than more radically capitalist theories. As I said, I do not have the time to research scholarly articles on the topic at the moment to provide links, but that said I am sure you could find them yourself. The reason I am reluctant to do so is time and time again I provided any of amount of information on CAF and posters reject it and argue it’s biased, statistics are distorted, or it’s not from a credible source without even reading it. I would add as a result of that experience when I post links I do so in a manner that enables me to determine if the poster has actually read it. If it’s obvious they have not I don’t post anymore as it would be a complete waste of my time and energy.

That said - here is one link.

plato.stanford.edu/entries/perfectionism-moral/

Suffice to say radical individualism and radical capitalism are not the only systems by which private ownership can be protected and free enterprise can flourish. Even Lenin permitted a degree of capitalism all be it in a very restricted form. People are free to reject other systems, but it cannot be argued capitalism is the only economic system that is God approved.

 

[minkymurph]

Hi Murph:

I hope you have been well since we last talked…

Hi Zoltan.

I’m well and not well. Incredibly happy yet disenchanted as I am about to graduate from university can’t get a job. I was recently turned down for a summer job serving chips in a kids fun park. :crying:

Actually it has been established on this thread that Capitalism is the word Karl Marx used to define the Free Market.

That may well be the case but I think we can agree a Marxist definition of capitalism is not the last word on the Free Market. Capitalism like everything else covers a very broad spectrum. In my view a mistake people make is to see capitalism/socialism in black and white terms. This is a very narrow and uninformed perspective. Political and economic theories cover a very broad spectrum.

Capitalism/Free Market offers much more than the recognition of God-given rights and free enterprise (or simply FREEDOM)

Could you start by listing God given rights and we will go from there?

Pride, dignity, self-confidence and self-esteem are characteristics of a Capitalist society.

Is pride not a sin?

They may characteristics of a capitalist society. Does that mean they are not characteristic of any other society?

Actually Laissez-faire Capitalism is the only social system based on the recognition of individual rights and, therefore, the only system that bans force from social relationships. By the nature of its basic principles and interests, it is the only system fundamentally opposed to war.

Are you saying a truly capitalist society would be neutral? Opposed to defending itself if attacked?

Capitalism cannot work with slave labor. It leaves no possibility for any one to serve their own interests by enslaving others.

We have discussed this point before and our respective definitions of slavery differ. That said, I don’t see how any system eradicates any possibility of using others to serve and individuals self interest to their detriment. Such a scenario could only be achieved by completing changing the nature of every person in it.

The moral justification of capitalism lies in the fact that it is the only system consonant with mankind’s rational nature, that it protects our survival and that its ruling principle is: justice.

It really does not get much better than that.

What about a society where no one cares how much money you have, how many degrees you have, what possessions you have or whether or not you have a flat stomach and a tan because the only thing that matters in that the society is the person you are inside, yet everyone is well fed, working productively and has simple but pleasant, warm and welcoming shelter? Of course I am too much of a realist to think to such a society will ever exist in this world. Just saying it would be better than a profit driven consumer society because people would be more content, value themselves more and had no fear for their own security - to mention a few.

But you are right to say that it is an error to think that any economic system is God-ordained. However, I would say that Capitalism is closer to God’s intentions for mankind than any other economic system to date. Therefore it SHOULD be God-ordained.

Ah, we agree on something.

God intentions for man is to share is eternal life. You don’t have to be a capitalist do to that. That is not to say we should not have a good life now, but if capitalism is close to God’s intentions how come the Church is speaking out against it? Now I would guess you may say that is because we don’t have ‘real’ capitalism. In which case I would say why have we not achieved this objective? You may say state interference, but how did we come to be in a situation were free thinking people in a democratic society let this happen? Perhaps because they want it to? In which case I would argue the Utopian ideals of capitalism I perceive you have will never become a reality, any more than my perception of Utopia, because human nature will always get in the way.

 

[sallybutler]

I agree with Minky. I suspect that anything since Adam’s fall is not God-ordained.

The next closest might be those that follow the rules listed in Leviticus (don’t charge interest, forgive anything owed to you every seven years, don’t work on the Sabbath, etc).

People used to believe that their kings were God-ordained. That would mean the economic systems they practiced were God-ordained.

It’s rather difficult to say what Jesus thought about businesses. I’ve read what some have quoted. However, one could also say that businesses must feed the hungry, visit those in prison, give their customers two items when they only asked for one.

Basically, any system that encourages us to put manna ahead of God is not God-ordained, but God-endured.

 

[Seraphim73]

Is society obligated to support those who do not or cannot support themselves? Is society obligated to bail out those who make poor decisions?

Societies don’t have obligations, only people have obligations. And yes Christians have an obligation to help others.

 

[Zoltan_Cobalt]

QUOTE=minkymurph;12237136]Hi Zoltan.

I’m well and not well. Incredibly happy yet disenchanted as I am about to graduate from university can’t get a job. I was recently turned down for a summer job serving chips in a kids fun park. :crying:

I am genuinely sorry and also shocked that a lovely, intelligent woman can’t get a good job. You have such a remarkable writing ability…you should be in demand.

When I immigrated to the U.S. (at 13 years old) all I wanted was to get a job at Disneyland. I didn’t want to go to school. Every time we would visit “The Park” I would fill out an application…I never did get that job. If I did it might have changed my whole life…Maybe I would still be working there.(?)

Cheer up Murph…something will come along.

That may well be the case but I think we can agree a Marxist definition of capitalism is not the last word on the Free Market. Capitalism like everything else covers a very broad spectrum. In my view a mistake people make is to see capitalism/socialism in black and white terms. This is a very narrow and uninformed perspective. Political and economic theories cover a very broad spectrum.

This, of course is true, but I am dismayed at the number of people who think they are the same. I give up here on the forums and simply consider them as one.

Could you start by listing God given rights and we will go from there?

The God-given right to life is the source of all rights. God-given rights are not granted by any government.
Any right that can be exercised without anyone’s permission…is God-given.

The Right to the Pursuit of Happiness, for example, is God-given. It means our right to live for ourselves, to choose what constitutes our own private, personal, individual happiness and to work for its achievement, so long as we respects the same right in others. It means that we cannot be forced to devote our life to the happiness of another or of any number of others It means that the government cannot decide what is to be the purpose of a our existence or prescribe our choice of happiness.

Is pride not a sin?

Is it??? Since when???

All those years of taking pride in the accomplishments of my children…taking pride in my own accomplishments…Oh.Boy…do I need to go to confession

Are you saying a truly capitalist society would be neutral? Opposed to defending itself if attacked?

No. As I have said before…the only reason a Capitalist society needs a government is to protect it from foreign invaders.

There are really only two ways to make a living. One is to work The other is to steal from the those who work. Capitalists work. Therefore they have to protect themselves from the “others”.

We have discussed this point before and our respective definitions of slavery differ. That said, I don’t see how any system eradicates any possibility of using others to serve and individuals self interest to their detriment. Such a scenario could only be achieved by completing changing the nature of every person in it.

Then we should define our terms…

Slavery is forcing an individual to be of service without remuneration.

Impossible in a Capitalist society.

“It stands to reason that where there’s sacrifice, there’s someone collecting sacrificial offerings. Where there’s service, there’s someone being served. The man who speaks to you of sacrifice, speaks of slaves and masters. And intends to be the master.”-- Ayn Rand

What about a society where no one cares how much money you have, how many degrees you have, what possessions you have or whether or not you have a flat stomach and a tan because the only thing that matters in that the society is the person you are inside, yet everyone is well fed, working productively and has simple but pleasant, warm and welcoming shelter? Of course I am too much of a realist to think to such a society will ever exist in this world. Just saying it would be better than a profit driven consumer society because people would be more content, value themselves more and had no fear for their own security - to mention a few.

Wow…leave out the flat tummies and the tan…and you come very close to my True, pure Capitalistic Society.

 

[Zoltan_Cobalt]

Ah, we agree on something.

God intentions for man is to share is eternal life. You don’t have to be a capitalist do to that. That is not to say we should not have a good life now, but if capitalism is close to God’s intentions how come the Church is speaking out against it? Now I would guess you may say that is because we don’t have ‘real’ capitalism. In which case I would say why have we not achieved this objective? You may say state interference, but how did we come to be in a situation were free thinking people in a democratic society let this happen? Perhaps because they want it to? In which case I would argue the Utopian ideals of capitalism I perceive you have will never become a reality, any more than my perception of Utopia, because human nature will always get in the way.

You know Murph…I don’t know what the Church is saying about Capitalism. There are posts of encyclicals posted all over this thread…this pope says this…that pope says that.
One seems to contradict the other. When the church speaks against Capitalism, it justifies it in the next sentence…" it may be bad…but better than the others…"

I will tell you exactly why we have not achieved the objective…True Capitalism.

We came close…but what started the fall was the fact that the lifeline feeding any social system is a culture’s dominant philosophy and capitalism never had a philosophical base. It was the last and (theoretically) incomplete product of an Aristotelian influence.

Philosophy changed in the nineteenth century, Capitalism was left in an intellectual vacuum. Neither its moral nature nor even its political principles had ever been fully understood or defined. Its alleged defenders regarded it as compatible with government controls (i.e., government interference into the economy), ignoring the meaning and implications of the concept of laissez-faire.

So, the result was not pure Capitalism, but variously mixed economies. Since controls necessitate and breed further controls, it was the statist element of the mixtures that wrecked them and laissez-faire Capitalism took the blame.

 

[magnet]

Societies don’t have obligations, only people have obligations. And yes Christians have an obligation to help others.

Human societies are collections of people. How can you separate the two? So Christians are obliged to support others who refuse to support themselves?

 

[Abu]

minkymurph #538
if capitalism is close to God’s intentions how come the Church is speaking out against it?

Why the continued refusals to acknowledge the reality of the papal approbations of free enterprise, and the refusal to drop the Marxist connotation? Some never learn to accept reality. This stubborn evasion of reality mirrors the lack in the Apostles as the loving Christ, Jesus rebuked those "whom He loved to the end” – “Have you no sense, no wits, are your hearts dulled, can’t you see, your ears hear, don’t you remember?” (Mk 8:17-18) (Frank Sheed, Christ In Eclipse, Sheed & Ward 1978, p 42).

As repeatedly shown, St John Paul II emphatically affirms free enterprise and abhors the mistaken term “capitalism”, teaching that as 'an economic system which recognizes the fundamental and positive role of business, the market, private property and the resulting responsibility for the means of production, as well as free human creativity in the economic sector… the answer is certainly in the affirmative, even though it would perhaps be more appropriate to speak of a “business economy”, “market economy” or simply "free economy".’ Centesimus Annus #42, 1991].

Since the effects of Original Sin taint every individual, it is only the virtuous who can apply virtuously any human endeavour even when based on natural laws as Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI has emphasised in Caritas et Veritate, 2009, #36:
“Society does not have to protect itself from the market, as if the development of the latter were ipso facto to entail the death of authentically human relations. Admittedly, the market can be a negative force, not because it is so by nature, but because a certain ideology can make it so. It must be remembered that the market does not exist in the pure state. It is shaped by the cultural configurations which define it and give it direction. Economy and finance, as instruments, can be used badly when those at the helm are motivated by purely selfish ends. Instruments that are good in themselves can thereby be transformed into harmful ones. But it is man’s darkened reason that produces these consequences, not the instrument per se. Therefore it is not the instrument that must be called to account, but individuals, their moral conscience and their personal and social responsibility.”

Sallybutler #539
It’s rather difficult to say what Jesus thought about businesses.

It is very easy to know what Jesus SAID about the work of business, because He was very clear in expressing His “thoughts”:
As CCC 546 points out: “The parables are like mirrors for man: will he be hard soil or good earth for the word? What use has he made of the talents he has received?”

Fr Percy’s summing up goes to the heart of the matter. He is not explaining the spiritual meaning which all real Catholics should accept, but the reality of worthy human endeavour which is praised, while unworthy endeavour is condemned.
“We can thus affirm unambiguously that Jesus Christ ‘looks with love on upon human work’ and that the work of the merchant – the businessman or the entrepreneur – is one of the ‘different forms’ of work that is affirmed. The parable of the talents makes this clear by its reference to money, trading, risk taking and banking.”
Entrepreneurship in the Catholic Tradition, Fr Anthony G Percy, Lexington Books, 2010, p 48-49].

one could also say that businesses must feed the hungry, visit those in prison

False. Learn what a business is: “The activity of providing goods and services involving financial and commercial and industrial aspects.” [WordWeb].

So it is PEOPLE who must be charitable, and carry out works of mercy! No one, nor any “system”, can be allowed to operate in a society without reasonable safeguards for that society and thus the Catholic way is free enterprise, sound laws, and the morals that maketh the man. The duty of governments is to make wise laws; that’s why we have laws to seek and punish those who steal, cheat, swindle, and to ensure competition. It is people who commit crimes. [My bold].

 

[freeRadical]

What does it say? You seem to know. How about providing a quote from the EPA regulation itself. Or would that prove that you are just making things up to annoy me.

You’re the one that brought the EPA up. Do you know what it say? While don’t you quote them. I don’t really care about the EPA.

 

[minkymurph]

Why the continued refusals to acknowledge the reality of the papal approbations of free enterprise, and the refusal to drop the Marxist connotation?

Because I’m not a Marxist - and Jesus was not a capitalist.

 

[minkymurph]

Hi Zoltan.

I am genuinely sorry and also shocked that a lovely, intelligent woman can’t get a good job. You have such a remarkable writing ability…you should be in demand.

When I immigrated to the U.S. (at 13 years old) all I wanted was to get a job at Disneyland. I didn’t want to go to school. Every time we would visit “The Park” I would fill out an application…I never did get that job. If I did it might have changed my whole life…Maybe I would still be working there.(?)

Cheer up Murph…something will come along.

I appreciate that Zolt.

The problem is there are lots of intelligent and talented people out there to compete with. The eternal optimist in me says something will come along, but I’m gutted my aspirations of becoming a lawyer have bit the dust. That said, someone once said to me, ‘Go through the door that is open.’ The next door that opens I’m going through it.

The God-given right to life is the source of all rights. God-given rights are not granted by any government.
Any right that can be exercised without anyone’s permission…is God-given.

Right to life - yep agree.
A right that can be exercised without permission - that’s a pretty good definition. I like it.

Is it??? Since when???

All those years of taking pride in the accomplishments of my children…taking pride in my own accomplishments…Oh.Boy…do I need to go to confession

Well some say pride is sin. I’ve never gone for it myself so we stand condemned together. :byzsoc:

No. As I have said before…the only reason a Capitalist society needs a government is to protect it from foreign invaders.

There are really only two ways to make a living. One is to work The other is to steal from the those who work. Capitalists work. Therefore they have to protect themselves from the “others”.

Good points, difficult to rebut. However - where do you stand on consumer protection?

Wow…leave out the flat tummies and the tan…and you come very close to my True, pure Capitalistic Society.

At least we have a similar vision - just can’t agree on how to achieve it.

 

[minkymurph]

You know Murph…I don’t know what the Church is saying about Capitalism. There are posts of encyclicals posted all over this thread…this pope says this…that pope says that.
One seems to contradict the other. When the church speaks against Capitalism, it justifies it in the next sentence…" it may be bad…but better than the others…"

A bit like democracy then?

The Church has recently spoke out of the inequalities and injustices that result from capitalism. We encountered each other on a thread discussing that very topic.

We came close…but what started the fall was the fact that the lifeline feeding any social system is a culture’s dominant philosophy and capitalism never had a philosophical base. It was the last and (theoretically) incomplete product of an Aristotelian influence.

Funny I’m currently writing an essay on the dominant culture and tyranny of the majority.

Philosophy changed in the nineteenth century, Capitalism was left in an intellectual vacuum. Neither its moral nature nor even its political principles had ever been fully understood or defined. Its alleged defenders regarded it as compatible with government controls (i.e., government interference into the economy), ignoring the meaning and implications of the concept of laissez-faire.

This is my very issue with capitalism. It’s moral nature and political principles have never been developed and defined and the most radical capitalists, libertarians, in my view duck the issue entirely.

 

[magnet]

The moral justification of capitalism does not lie in the altruist claim that it represents the best way to achieve ‘the common good.’ It is true that capitalism does—if that catch-phrase has any meaning—but this is merely a secondary consequence. The moral justification of capitalism lies in the fact that it is the only system consonant with man’s rational nature, that it protects man’s survival qua man, and that its ruling principle is: justice.” — AYN RAND

 

[ThomasJMullally]

Certainly.

thecommonsjournal.org/index.php/ijc/article/view/252/182

There are many society’s that function very effectively with a system of communal living/ownership that runs parallel to private ownership and free enterprise. Now it can be argued such systems are not effective in the contemporary western societies, but there is a lot we can learn from their principles.
…

Suffice to say radical individualism and radical capitalism are not the only systems by which private ownership can be protected and free enterprise can flourish. Even Lenin permitted a degree of capitalism all be it in a very restricted form. People are free to reject other systems, but it cannot be argued capitalism is the only economic system that is God approved.

Yes, mankind does not own the Earth, God owns the earth, and we are the custodians. And we are doing a selfish and sinful job.

For true freedom to to exist, property rights should be put into proper place, as a function of more basic human rights. Other forms of ownership such as re-establishing the commons seized in Britain five centuries ago, is an excellent concept. It would be part and parcel of the Distributism.

 

[ThomasJMullally]

A bit like democracy then?

The Church has recently spoke out of the inequalities and injustices that result from capitalism. We encountered each other on a thread discussing that very topic.

Funny I’m currently writing an essay on the dominant culture and tyranny of the majority.

This is my very issue with capitalism. It’s moral nature and political principles have never been developed and defined and the most radical capitalists, libertarians, in my view duck the issue entirely.

Minky, we essentially have a system that at its very best is morally neutral. It was designed on its face (according to Smith’s “Wealth of Nations”) to negate the efforts of the common man to make a profit, through an “invisible hand” of competition enforced by the laws of the capitalist state. However in our latter-day embellishment it gets even worse (as these gentlemen agree)-- the largest corporations are exempted from this enforced competition, due to their controlling the highest reaches of our government. Every law that affects business, is designed in their favor, and in favor of generating more business turnover. In favor of creating a false “growth”, which is paid for in the human suffering of the common man.

 

[sallybutler]

Why the continued refusals to acknowledge the reality of the papal approbations of free enterprise, and the refusal to drop the Marxist connotation? Some never learn to accept reality. This stubborn evasion of reality mirrors the lack in the Apostles as the loving Christ, Jesus rebuked those "whom He loved to the end” – “Have you no sense, no wits, are your hearts dulled, can’t you see, your ears hear, don’t you remember?” (Mk 8:17-18) (Frank Sheed, Christ In Eclipse, Sheed & Ward 1978, p 42).

As repeatedly shown, St John Paul II emphatically affirms free enterprise and abhors the mistaken term “capitalism”, teaching that as 'an economic system which recognizes the fundamental and positive role of business, the market, private property and the resulting responsibility for the means of production, as well as free human creativity in the economic sector… the answer is certainly in the affirmative, even though it would perhaps be more appropriate to speak of a “business economy”, “market economy” or simply "free economy".’ Centesimus Annus #42, 1991].

Since the effects of Original Sin taint every individual, it is only the virtuous who can apply virtuously any human endeavour even when based on natural laws as Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI has emphasised in Caritas et Veritate, 2009, #36:
“Society does not have to protect itself from the market, as if the development of the latter were ipso facto to entail the death of authentically human relations. Admittedly, the market can be a negative force, not because it is so by nature, but because a certain ideology can make it so. It must be remembered that the market does not exist in the pure state. It is shaped by the cultural configurations which define it and give it direction. Economy and finance, as instruments, can be used badly when those at the helm are motivated by purely selfish ends. Instruments that are good in themselves can thereby be transformed into harmful ones. But it is man’s darkened reason that produces these consequences, not the instrument per se. Therefore it is not the instrument that must be called to account, but individuals, their moral conscience and their personal and social responsibility.”
It is very easy to know what Jesus SAID about the work of business, because He was very clear in expressing His “thoughts”:
As CCC 546 points out: “The parables are like mirrors for man: will he be hard soil or good earth for the word? What use has he made of the talents he has received?”

Fr Percy’s summing up goes to the heart of the matter. He is not explaining the spiritual meaning which all real Catholics should accept, but the reality of worthy human endeavour which is praised, while unworthy endeavour is condemned.
“We can thus affirm unambiguously that Jesus Christ ‘looks with love on upon human work’ and that the work of the merchant – the businessman or the entrepreneur – is one of the ‘different forms’ of work that is affirmed. The parable of the talents makes this clear by its reference to money, trading, risk taking and banking.”
Entrepreneurship in the Catholic Tradition, Fr Anthony G Percy, Lexington Books, 2010, p 48-49].
False. Learn what a business is: “The activity of providing goods and services involving financial and commercial and industrial aspects.” [WordWeb].

So it is PEOPLE who must be charitable, and carry out works of mercy! No one, nor any “system”, can be allowed to operate in a society without reasonable safeguards for that society and thus the Catholic way is free enterprise, sound laws, and the morals that maketh the man. The duty of governments is to make wise laws; that’s why we have laws to seek and punish those who steal, cheat, swindle, and to ensure competition. It is people who commit crimes. [My bold].

Since businesses are created by people to be instruments of people, then the people running the business should be running those businesses in a charitable manner. If a Christian owns a business that is not being run in a Christian manner, it is still the fault of the owner. This concept that somehow a business is separate from it’s owners rather than an extension of it’s owners seems to be used for justifying not doing one’s Christian duty in all aspects of one’s life.

Sins of ommission can be just as grevious as sins of commission.

 

[ThomasJMullally]

Since businesses are created by people to be instruments of people, then the people running the business should be running those businesses in a charitable manner. If a Christian owns a business that is not being run in a Christian manner, it is still the fault of the owner. This concept that somehow a business is separate from it’s owners rather than an extension of it’s owners seems to be used for justifying not doing one’s Christian duty in all aspects of one’s life.

Sins of ommission can be just as grevious as sins of commission.

Correct-- it is the shortcoming of the system. It formally separates man from his morality.

 

[clem456]

Correct-- it is the shortcoming of the system. It formally separates man from his morality.

No system separates man from morality. Each person chooses to act immorally of his own free well. If immoral individuals are organized into larger societal or business structures then those can be corrupted in to structures or activities that are immoral.

 

[clem456]

Correct-- it is the shortcoming of the system. It formally separates man from his morality.

No system separates man from morality. Each person chooses to act immorally of his own free will. If immoral individuals are organized into larger societal or business structures then those can be corrupted.

 

[ThomasJMullally]

No system separates man from morality. Each person chooses to act immorally of his own free will. If immoral individuals are organized into larger societal or business structures then those can be corrupted.

Sorry, sallybutler brought it up. Our personal and business responsibilities are formally divided. People are alienated not only from one another, but from themselves. There is little penalty for economic recklessness. To encourage innovation, the system encourages: waste, plundering, exploitation of the weak, etc.

Are we still on Catholic.com? Did I hit the wrong button?